/b

Twitter Updates

What People Say:
"I never thought I'd read the phrase Crazy Politico's Rantings in the NYT. I'll bet they never thought they'd print anything like that phrase either." TLB

Blogroll Me!

My Blog Rolls

American Flag Bloggers

American Flags

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Abu Ghraib And Gitmo

In today's paper there are two articles that caught my eye over lunch. The first deals with an Australian TV station showing more pictures that supposedly came from Abu Ghraib. The Washington Post's online edition has one picture, which the writer describes, in great detail. The writer admits there is no evidence to prove the pictures shown came from the prison, or if they did if they were taken pre or post invasion. They still use them to build a case for a case that was built two years ago.

Since the paper has been so worried about unnecessarily inflammitory actions in regard to the provoking cartoons, why print this article ? The author himself notes the following:

"Just as certainly as they will inflame the Arab and Muslim world, they will raise the question of whether it is responsible for Western news organizations to distribute them. And for bloggers to post them. And for pundits to debate them. Do they add anything new, or only open old wounds? Do they undo the work of investigation, trial and punishment that put men like Charles Graner, one of the original perpetrators, behind bars?"

It's a good question, and unfortunately the answer is, no there is nothing to be gained by showing them anymore. Just like at this point there really isn't any reason to print the Mohamed cartoons. They've had their effect, they are old news, move on. Some of us though who have been suspicious of the Post's editorial policies might say that they do have a reason for printing this article, embarass the President.

While some will say that it's the standard conservative bias against the "mainstream media", I'd say look at how the Post has handled the cartoon issue, apply that standard to Abu Ghraib and see if there is a difference. If you think the Post is being a little lax on their own, recently reinterated standards, the letter to the editor button is still in the upper left of the blog.

The second article, which I caught on Yahoo News, and then again in the Post's rendition has to do with the European Union, and United Nations deciding how we should handle the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

A 54 page report, that the Bush administration has already rejected was released today by the UN. The author of the report says:

"Those people should be released or brought before an independent court," Manfred Nowak, the U.N. investigator for torture, told The Associated Press. "That should not be done in Guantanamo Bay, but before ordinary U.S. courts, or courts in their countries of origin or perhaps an international tribunal."


The EU is also calling for their release and the closing of the Guantanamo Camp, along with those in the middle east.

I'll reject the US Courts out of hand, as the prisoners at Gitmo and being held in Iraq and Afghanistan have no standing in US courts. They weren't captured in the US, they are enemy combatants captured on battlefields in other countries. In fact, the 11th Amendment of the constitution PROHIBITS our courts from acting in these cases:

Amendment XI - Judicial Limits. The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

Courts of the countries of origin are probably the best bet, though I'm quite sure many detainees would challenge that idea, saying that the new governments of Iraq and Afghanistan can't be trusted to give them a fair trial. That leaves an internation tribunal, which I believe would make Amnesty International and the Democratic Party happy, but would probably piss off most ordinary Americans.

As to the European Union's Parliment, I have an idea. Since they dislike these camps so much, I believe we should charter and Air France flight or two, and send the detainees to Europe to live. We've seen how well angry muslims have integrated into their society, so it shouldn't be a real problem for them. Unless of course they need cars to get to work.

Junkyard Blog has more up on this, including an actors reaction, like we need Hollywierd to tell us what to do.

Technorati Tags: and

3Comments:

Blogger The_Bos'un said...

The heck with the corrupt United Nations. They should clean up their organization. Gitmo should stay open.

As far as treating prisoners badly, it was the lack of management and leadership from the general and her staff that allowed the prison to get out of control in Iraq. We have since straightend out that problem.

The New York Slimes and Los Angeles Slimes can print whatever yellow journalism they want. Perhaps the muslims should start to blame them for bad publicity.

R/ Bosun

1:24 AM  
Blogger Assorted Babble by Suzie said...

Someone wrote a post yesterday...funny too where all these prisoners should have to go live with Dems. (LOL) BZ I think!! My memory is terrible.

Yeah, the prisoners at Gitmo have it pretty darn good down there w/ better food menus that get served here. (LOL)plus music piped in, etc. (LOL) They live better there than where they came from.

This is disgusting releasing these latest pictures...as you said...it is old news and no need to inflame these idiots anymore than they are already.

8:02 AM  
Blogger Crazy Politico said...

Suzie, you are right, very few prisons give folks what they are getting in Gitmo. Maybe we should find out how they would be treated in their home countries and let them go there.

Bosun, I agree, screw the UN :)

2:22 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home